Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Capture One Q&A => Topic started by: Rhossydd on November 30, 2017, 04:10:49 am
-
https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Software/Capture-One-Pro/Whats-new.aspx
A lot of interesting additions for processing, but sadly almost nothing that adds to it's DAM facilities.
-
For those interested, a full review of Capture One Pro 11 is available at Capture One Pro 11 Review (https://imagealchemist.net/capture-one-pro-11-review/)
-
Video review from AlexOnRaw/Sasha Svet/
https://youtu.be/guNqkH_Kh-A (https://youtu.be/guNqkH_Kh-A)
-
The prices for the upgrades gone up, didn't they used to be lower?
-
Paul's review mentioned above has a link to get 10% off.
-
Great news!
On my side, a bit less... I have finally bought the upgrade to release 10 a month ago (28 oct.) and now that :-( I hope there will be a grace period. It is the second time it happens to me :( It was the same when I have upgraded to r8, r9 was out a month and half later.
-
Just look at the Wikipedia page that lists it's release dates, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capture_One , and you'll see that the last few releases have all happened at pretty much the same time of year.
-
Just looked in my old orders. Update Pro for Sony was 40, is 69 now ... well. Will buy anyway, the adjustable opacity for layers is really something that I waited for!
-
Our take...
Learn About it:
Capture One 11 New Features (https://digitaltransitions.com/capture-one-11-layers-annotations-scripting-speed-potpourri/)
Master It:
Capture One Training (https://digitaltransitions.com/capture-one-training/)
Buy it:
Buy Capture One 11 (https://digitaltransitions.com/product-category/capture-one/)
Script it:
Capture One AppleScript Tutorial Set (https://digitaltransitions.com/product/dt-building-blocks-applescripts/)
-
Hi All
Unable to upgrade either from the program or Phase One website I'm running 10.2.1 .
Jon
-
Hi All
Unable to upgrade either from the program or Phase One website I'm running 10.2.1 .
Jon
Download it, install it, open it. The rest will follow.
https://www.phaseone.com/en/Download.aspx
-
> LAB Readouts. Available in Capture One CH for years, this option is now available in Capture One Pro.
finally... now did they screw that by making it integer like Adobe did or with .xx precision like Iridient did ?
-
> LAB Readouts. Available in Capture One CH for years, this option is now available in Capture One Pro.
finally... now did they screw that by making it integer like Adobe did or with .xx precision like Iridient did ?
With .xx precision
But I have not yet worked out how to use the feature or which readout option to choose :(
-
For those interested, a full review of Capture One Pro 11 is available at Capture One Pro 11 Review (https://imagealchemist.net/capture-one-pro-11-review/)
Thanks. I tried the coupon, but it is not working for upgrades.
-
Thanks. I tried the coupon, but it is not working for upgrades.
Worked fine for me. You put in the coupon, then click on the gray box to the right to validate it. Upgrade went smoothly.
-
Download it, install it, open it. The rest will follow.
https://www.phaseone.com/en/Download.aspx
Thats the point it wouldn't let me download it.
-
With .xx precision
inconvenient for somebody who is not trying to do lab grade reproduction, the really useful is just .x precision , integers are too rough (shame on Adobe) and .xx is overkill
but it is better than nothing
But I have not yet worked out how to use the feature or which readout option to choose :(
for example when my eyes are tired after many images or I have less than ideal monitor/environment I 'd rather get certain colors within certain a/b range that I know works for my needs ... granted something where luma is separated from chroma from hue is better, but lab still better then rgb coordinates
-
No Fuji GFX 50S support. :-\
-
Worked fine for me. You put in the coupon, then click on the gray box to the right to validate it. Upgrade went smoothly.
There was an issue for CO9 to CO11 upgrades where the coupon offered is not working. This is fixed now. Thank you.
-
For those interested, a full review of Capture One Pro 11 is available at Capture One Pro 11 Review (https://imagealchemist.net/capture-one-pro-11-review/)
Thanks, that's the best C1 11 overview I've seen.
Have you noticed any improvements regarding the often poor quality of C1 previews (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=118700.msg986332#msg986332)?
Apparently, not all users seem up in arms about this issue but it has popped up multiple times (e.g., on the C1 forum as well (https://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=26450&p=124628#p124628)) and any discerning user should take issue with the lack of micro-contrast at low magnification levels.
Working at 100% magnification (which would address the preview issue) is simply an unworkable proposition as many image adjustments require full view of the image for context. Using the "Proof" feature is a workaround but implies a very distracting "Proofing" label and makes editing too slow.
Independently of the fact that the previews are often unfit for editing, they shouldn't look so bad in the first place. With many shots, it looks like they should be discarded as being too blurry to be useful, but zooming in a couple of magnification steps (or using the "Proof" feature) reveals that they are perfectly sharp and only require adequate rendering at the viewing size when shown at "full size".
I believe the problem is the following: C1 generates a preview image at a user-specified size (-> Preferences | Image | Preview Image Size). This size is typically much larger than a typical rendering size which means that the image has to be downscaled. We are thus talking about a second-generation downscale (1. from original size to preview size, 2. from preview size to viewing size). C1 simply does not sufficiently counteract for the softness introduced by the second downscaling.
If one sets the preview size to 640, thus forcing C1 to custom-generate a preview for any viewing size that exceeds 640px, the generated preview is fine! I would live with the small delay this causes (although it would be much better if C1 simply stored additional previews for low viewing magnification levels) but when I edit images with this low preview size setting, the experience is very jarring, as C1 apparently uses the 640px preview image instead of the just-in-time custom-generated image for showing adjustments.
Long story, short: C1 10 has a preview quality issue that is the result of an engineering compromise. The fix is easy and could be made optional, i.e., not mandatory for those who do not want to pay the price in increased preview storage or slight re-rendering delays. If C11 does not address this issue, I most likely won't pay the increased upgrade price to get C11.
-
I have a never used v. 10 license. Does anyone know if that will be valid for v. 11?
-
I have a never used v. 10 license. Does anyone know if that will be valid for v. 11?
it shall be very valid for the upgrade price ;)
-
it shall be very valid for the upgrade price ;)
That I'm sure of ;D
-
Hi All
Finally have a working copy of CO11 but what a faf it should be be seamless for registered users.
Regards
Jon
-
The prices for the upgrades gone up, didn't they used to be lower?
Definitely seems significantly more expensive in the UK. It's now more than the annual licence for Lightroom + PS. Giving me second thoughts...
-
The subscription (which I use) price went up earlier this year too. So far I'm grandfathered with my original price so it doesn't bother me much, but if P1 wants to turn C1 into a more substantial revenue stream by itself they should start supporting the other micromedium format cameras like GFX50 or X1D as well.
That said, I haven't upgraded to v11 yet even though I can, the past few major releases have been plagued with GUI bugs (especially on Windows) in the beginning and I'm not willing to do QA for P1.
-
but if P1 wants to turn C1 into a more substantial revenue stream by itself they should start supporting the other micromedium format cameras like GFX50 or X1D as well.
No significant revenue from targeting minority products. The gold is getting the dissatisfied mass market to move from LR.
-
More a question for Dave Grover than anything.
When can we expect to see Lens Profiles for some of the more popular lenses such as the Nikon 300mm PF and the Sigma 135mm Art?
-
Definitely seems significantly more expensive in the UK. It's now more than the annual licence for Lightroom + PS. Giving me second thoughts...
Likewise - maybe I will have to do what I did with PS and only upgrade alternate years.
-
Definitely seems significantly more expensive in the UK.
Not once you use the discount code above, then it's roughly the same.
At least CO continues to have an upgrade policy enlightened enough to allow you to skip a version without a massive financial penalty.
-
I bought into the Capture One universe in 2010, and looked up my payment history earlier this morning. What I saw was not as expensive as I had dreaded:
Bought C1 Pro v5 SEPTEMBER 2010 €179
Upgraded to v6 FEBRUARY 2011 €69
Upgraded to v7 MARCH 2014 €45
Switched to subscription APRIL 2015 @ €8/month
Paid €96 total until 28.03.2016
Subscription increased to €12/month in April 2016
Paid two subscription fees total €24 until June 2016
Reverted to paid upgrade (v9) MAY 2016 €99
Upgrade to v10 paid (via Paypal) 23 February this year failed, and I was given a temporary number the next day, which lasted quite a long time! I have been getting by on v11 betas since. Or reverting to v9.
Now the upgrade to v11 is €119 = $186AU!
Total spent over seven years—if I include the not-yet-paid upgrade to v11: €631 = €90 per annum = $140.67AU/pa or $11.72AU per month.
Happy enough with that costing—I am officially retired, but still get paying work occasionally. If only I could get rid of my Adobe Photography plan!
-
Thanks, that's the best C1 11 overview I've seen.
Have you noticed any improvements regarding the often poor quality of C1 previews (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=118700.msg986332#msg986332)?
Apparently, not all users seem up in arms about this issue but it has popped up multiple times (e.g., on the C1 forum as well (https://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=26450&p=124628#p124628)) and any discerning user should take issue with the lack of micro-contrast at low magnification levels.
Working at 100% magnification (which would address the preview issue) is simply an unworkable proposition as many image adjustments require full view of the image for context. Using the "Proof" feature is a workaround but implies a very distracting "Proofing" label and makes editing too slow.
Independently of the fact that the previews are often unfit for editing, they shouldn't look so bad in the first place. With many shots, it looks like they should be discarded as being too blurry to be useful, but zooming in a couple of magnification steps (or using the "Proof" feature) reveals that they are perfectly sharp and only require adequate rendering at the viewing size when shown at "full size".
I believe the problem is the following: C1 generates a preview image at a user-specified size (-> Preferences | Image | Preview Image Size). This size is typically much larger than a typical rendering size which means that the image has to be downscaled. We are thus talking about a second-generation downscale (1. from original size to preview size, 2. from preview size to viewing size). C1 simply does not sufficiently counteract for the softness introduced by the second downscaling.
If one sets the preview size to 640, thus forcing C1 to custom-generate a preview for any viewing size that exceeds 640px, the generated preview is fine! I would live with the small delay this causes (although it would be much better if C1 simply stored additional previews for low viewing magnification levels) but when I edit images with this low preview size setting, the experience is very jarring, as C1 apparently uses the 640px preview image instead of the just-in-time custom-generated image for showing adjustments.
Long story, short: C1 10 has a preview quality issue that is the result of an engineering compromise. The fix is easy and could be made optional, i.e., not mandatory for those who do not want to pay the price in increased preview storage or slight re-rendering delays. If C11 does not address this issue, I most likely won't pay the increased upgrade price to get C11.
I set the preview size to the dimensions of my 27" screen and it is horrible and blurry. Does it really give you a good preview if you set the size to something as small as 640px? Logically one would expect a totally pixelated preview.
-
In the review was no mention that the poor and unworkable database has been replaced with something that works as well as Lightroom's.
And has gotten a better search interface.
I see unnecessary features, but no fix to the core problems.
-
I see unnecessary features, but no fix to the core problems.
They may be unnecessary to you, but the new features will please the existing user base. The 'problems' you see are a lack of a particular functionality that hasn't been a major concern.
Yes, I'd like to see the DAM features ramped up a lot, but we'll probably have to wait a year before the next upgrade before you might see anything significant.
-
I set the preview size to the dimensions of my 27" screen and it is horrible and blurry. Does it really give you a good preview if you set the size to something as small as 640px? Logically one would expect a totally pixelated preview.
I don't think so. Viewing at a larger size than the preview will trigger a re-rendering with the current settings, and is thus a bit slower.
Having said that, I'm still not convinced that your issue is not hardware related. On my Windows 10 system with Nvidia graphics processor, I see hardly any loss of sharpness (I've shown a comparison in another thread), beyond what can be expected from a downsampling without resharpening for micro-contrast.
Cheers,
Bart
-
In the review was no mention that the poor and unworkable database has been replaced with something that works as well as Lightroom's.
I'm not sure I understand this statement. The database in C1 V11 is the same sqlite database as in version 10 and before, with a few additional columns in some tables. No new or deleted tables.
And LR also uses sqlite. The difference is in the data model, which is completely different between LR and C1
-
I'm not sure I understand this statement.
It's just a moan that CO still lacks severely in it's DAM capability.
Yes, the database is sqlite for both, but database format isn't really important. How you put the data into the images/library and how much flexibility there is in finding and sorting it is the real importance.
-
I don't think so. Viewing at a larger size than the preview will trigger a re-rendering with the current settings, and is thus a bit slower.
Having said that, I'm still not convinced that your issue is not hardware related. On my Windows 10 system with Nvidia graphics processor, I see hardly any loss of sharpness (I've shown a comparison in another thread), beyond what can be expected from a downsampling without resharpening for micro-contrast.
Cheers,
Bart
It has nothing to do with hardware. It's a problem how previews are worked with. This problem is confirmed.
There are just different sensibilities. Differences that for some are unacceptable aren't even noticed by others.
Just take a look about those comparisons between medium format files and the high pixel Nikons. There are reviews that put images side by side and state that there's not much of a difference, even though you can see - even though the test images are very poor - that there are a lot of differences.
-
They may be unnecessary to you, but the new features will please the existing user base. The 'problems' you see are a lack of a particular functionality that hasn't been a major concern.
Yes, I'd like to see the DAM features ramped up a lot, but we'll probably have to wait a year before the next upgrade before you might see anything significant.
This is why C1 has become a mass market software.
Features for the masses, and lacking in core functionality like DAM and preview quality. And the masses eat it up. So the company saves on expensive coding to fix those confirmed issues. Expensive because this goes to the core of the software.
Instead Phase One tacks on some features which is cheap to code and leaves the core problems untouched.
It' all marketing - they can call this version with more features a new full version instead of an incremental upgrade - which it truly is.
A preview that is not exactly what you get in the output file makes a software useless for finer work as you cannot see what you are doing. And you cannot edit in 100% view.
Why would I want features if I can't correctly see what I am doing as the preview is bad?
If you do not see the difference between absolutely necessary core functionality and tacked-on features you are joining the majority of software users.
Which is why Phase One and many other software companies do it. It's a quick buck strategy, and they get away with it.
-
The preview issue is really annoying. The worst part is that in some conditions it actually changes the color appearance at different sizes.
With respect to DAM, it is debatable if this should be a core functionality or not. I'm interested in the best raw converter instead of a good at everything, excel at nothing kind of tool.
-
Not once you use the discount code above, then it's roughly the same.
At least CO continues to have an upgrade policy enlightened enough to allow you to skip a version without a massive financial penalty.
It still is significantly more expensive even after the discount. But yes, the skip-a-version possibility helps.
-
It still is significantly more expensive even after the discount. But yes, the skip-a-version possibility helps.
Yes, the price increase is significant. I suppose we have Adobe to thank for that as well. With so many people trying to jump ship after they abandoned the perpetual subscriptions for Lightroom, Phase One probably wanted to set a new/higher baseline pricing for the newcomers (and figured they could overcome the temporary loss of a few faithful users). But for working professionals, it's a manageable increase, for this round ...
It does mean that users will become more critical/vocal when things do not work as expected. I'll also have a few items that need to be improved to keep me satisfied in the field of emerging alternatives.
The initial version 11 functionality additions are quite useful for several types of (especially professional commissioned work) users. But e.g. the restrictions to layered (proprietary) PSD files for some of the output, instead of TIFF, makes little sense to me. To name one issue.
Cheers,
Bart
-
The preview issue is really annoying. The worst part is that in some conditions it actually changes the color appearance at different sizes.
I wasn't quite sure what people complained about here but such changes in color I've seen as well. I've put it down to some problems with the graphics card and the GPU use I but never bothered to really track it down. I haven't seen it recently. C1 keeps changing use of GPU from version to version. I think you can currently only switch between auto and none for GPU usage in the settings, which essentially means you don't know whether the GPU is being used or not unless you set it to none.
With respect to DAM, it is debatable if this should be a core functionality or not.
Well, if it isn't then C1 shouldn't reinvent the file system. I can perfectly organize my files in a directory structure but C1 makes it hard to use it. Tried to import a folder and all the subfolders?
And what really bugs me with the release of version 11 is that V 10 is now essentially without support. I doubt that if you find a bug and report it that it will be fixed in a new 10.something release.
-
Working at 100% magnification (which would address the preview issue) is simply an unworkable proposition as many image adjustments require full view of the image for context. Using the "Proof" feature is a workaround but implies a very distracting "Proofing" label and makes editing too slow.
I am not sure I would agree that the "proof" label is very distracting, please see attached image. To me it looks quite small.
I also do not see any problems with the preview images. Could this issue be hardware related?
I am using a 27" monitor with a Nvidia 1060 graphics card. The C1 preview size is set to 2560 (default). If I was to use a 640px preview size this would have to be enlarged significantly for display?
I checked the pixel size of the image showing the proof label and the actual image is 2330x1440 px. Not that great a difference between the original preview size. Is this why I don't see the issues you are bothered by?
Ian
-
It still is significantly more expensive even after the discount.
What am I missing here ? the upgrade is 119 euros > 10% discount takes it to 107 > convert to UK pounds > £92 add VAT gets it to £110.
Adobe photography plan is £10 a month, £120pa so it's actually cheaper than sticking with LR.
Where's this significant extra cost ?
-
What am I missing here ? the upgrade is 119 euros > 10% discount takes it to 107 > convert to UK pounds > £92 add VAT gets it to £110.
Adobe photography plan is £10 a month, £120pa so it's actually cheaper than sticking with LR.
Where's this significant extra cost ?
The V11 upgrade is more expensive than the previous V10 upgrade was.
Cheers,
Bart
-
The V11 upgrade is more expensive than the previous V10 upgrade was.
Cheers,
Bart
...by a grand total of...18 dollars ::)
-
The V11 upgrade is more expensive than the previous V10 upgrade was.
Not by much, but I was refencing the assertion;
<the upgrade> Definitely seems significantly more expensive in the UK. It's now more than the annual licence for Lightroom + PS.
Er, no, it's still cheaper.
-
Thanks. I tried the coupon, but it is not working for upgrades.
Hi, apologies for the inconvenience. It should be working now. Thank you.
-
I went ahead and upgraded without the coupon. Any credit available?